Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 434: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs the reason Údarás na Gaeltachta did not pay superannuation contributions for a person (details supplied) in County Mayo for the five years they worked with them; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7189/07]

Michael Ring (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 435: To ask the Minister for Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs his views on whether Údarás na Gaeltachta have an obligation to pay superannuation in respect of their supervisor staff, particularly those who have worked with Údarás for a number of years; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [7190/07]

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 434 and 435 together.

I understand from Údarás na Gaeltachta that the person referred to by the Deputy was in fact employed as a supervisor on a Community Employment Scheme for a number of years until he reached retirement age.

As the Deputy is aware, Community Employment Schemes are managed by FÁS on behalf of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. Under this initiative, public bodies and voluntary organisations may sponsor projects at local level. In the Gaeltacht areas, Údarás na Gaeltachta sponsors 18 such schemes, employing 18 supervisors and approximately 360 participants.

I also understand from Údarás na Gaeltachta that supervisors are employed on a contract basis and that no superannuation contributions are made in respect of such contracts. However, supervisors and participants are made aware that they can partake in pension funds such as PRSA and that Údarás can facilitate this option by deduction of the relevant amount and payment into the relevant pension funds.

I have been informed that the person in question has referred his case to the Pensions Ombudsman and that enquiries are ongoing. As the Deputy will appreciate, the ruling of the Pensions Ombudsman is binding on all parties, subject to the right of appeal and, therefore, it would be inappropriate for me to comment further in the matter.